To feel sorry for (and think the punishment is too long) for the 18 year old who threw the fire extinguisher in the protests

[LaurieFairyonthetreeEatsCake]

2 years, 8 months in jail

here

That's a looooong time. Is the reasoning supposed to be that it's a deterrent?

There are people with asbo's who cause no end of trouble and don't get sentences like this.

sakura have you even read the story

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299982/Manslaughter-TV-executive-given-18-months-killing-wife-burnt-roast-beef-row.html

mtpt.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/a-knee-jerk-reaction-to-a-domestic-violence-sentence/

Have a look at this. Nice easy synopsis of the issues surrounding the Wicks case.

"smallwhitecat, it seems that very few get life if the average sentence is four years. That means lots are getting less than 4 years."

I think smallwhitecat's point was that the 4 years for murder issue is rubbish. You don't get 4 years for murder. You don't get 2 years or 6 years either. You get life. A mandatory life sentence. No ifs, no buts. Life.

There is of course a minimum period recommendation but that is a whole different matter.

MangoTango I don't belive for a second hat anyone on this thread saying the sentence was too long would be here saying that if on the day their child had come home and said "mum, some nutter threw a fire extinguisher off a 7 story building and it nearly hit me and the group I was protesting with... we were lucky we wern't killed"

Its only ok when people play god with other people's families

The mens rea is the same - so you don't get longer for actually killing someone, the crime is the same, its just luck that he did not kill someone.

Hence why drink driving sentences seem so light, its the same crime (drink driving) whether you kill someone or not is just luck (or not for the victim)

noddyholder.
For the avoidance of doubt I was referring to your preposterous suggestion that somebody may have advised him to plead guilty on the proviso his sentence would be reduced on appeal.
I've never heard such utter bollocks.
And no, I won't 'sod off'

dotnet - interestingly enough, you have posted about an issue that is in the pipeline. You can't have custody AND probation at the moment. However, there is something called "custody plus" which should have come into force a while ago and has been shelved. Very irritating as I did a long, boring training course on it and never got to use the information.

It would be a custodial sentence (albeit not such a short one as you suggest) followed by a period of probation. It is part of a package of sentencing options including "intermittent custody" where you work during the week and go to prison at the weekend and "custody minus" which I can't for the life of me remember!

I am not sure whether it ever will come in to force - I supsect not as it was a Labour initiative. I would actually quite like to see it come in as it would provide a really useful sentencing option in cases where only a custodial sentence is fitting for the seriousness of the offence, but where rehabilitation is a real prospect.

There are some gaps in the sentencing system and it would be good to see them filled. One problem is that you can't have a suspended sentence as a juvenile. So where an adult might get the "last chance" of a suspended sentence, a juvenile jumps straight from the level of a community order to a minimum of 4 months custody. The whole structure needs overhauling but it is not going to happen because of the avolutionary nature of the criminal justice system. you can't just stop everything one day and start thenxt day with a completely new system.

jonicomelately - oh I don't know. I've heard some other utter bollocks recently!

It is not a preposterous suggestion at all the legal system in this country is well known for its dishonesty and I have experienced this twice at first hand.There is error and corruption.You have never heard such bollocks Lucky you.

why probation? he has no issue that probation usually address

As to this intermittent custody thing we have that in a roundabout way with open prisons.
They go out during the day, smuggle booze in and then burn the place down.

I live quite near Ford and once at work our lifts broke down and we had a gang of Ford prisons come in to to form a human chain up the stairs to cart boxes up and down. Nice of them to tell us after they left though.

I've just read the article Takver provided a link for, from Cam magazine about the Garden House riots in Cambridge in 1970. Thankyou, Takver, that was really interesting.
It seems in that case too, the sentencing was over the top (the judge, Justice Melford Stevenson, was known to be the severest on the criminal bench).
I feel a little bit better about what Edward Woollard is going to go through, having read that 1970 student Nick Emsley, who served 7 months in borstal - mind you, that's only half of what Edward Woollard is going to have to serve as a minimum - says '...I didn't find it such a horrendous thing. It wasn't that different from my prep school, which I went to aged eight.'
For anyone who doesn't want to go back and click on the link to the article Takver provided - the Garden House riots developed from a demo against the Greek Junta (Cambridge City Council was helping promote tourism in Greece).
A then medical student, Stephen Amiel, now says 'The fact that the Garden House riots created so much negative publicity for the Greek regime was fantastic.'
And Bob Rawthorn, who in 1970 was an economics lecturer and a Fellow of King's, says, 'So, if someone said , 'If you had planned to do something like that, could you justify it? I'd say no. But it wasn't planned as a riot. The trouble is, demonstrations do get out of hand.''

You are very mistaken noddyholder. If you feel you've received rough justice in the past then I am very sorry but as I've said in an earlier post we have one of the best criminal justice sytems in the world. It isn't perfect but it's pretty much free from corruption.

pmsl @ free from corruption!Hides thread

So you reckon that people work all the hours god sends, get into massive debt to fund their way through law school and when they are lucky enough to get a place in a solicitors office or chambers, risk it all on some shady bollocks? Perhaps they do on whatever shitbird criminal drama your legal experience is based on but in the real world, honestly love, they don't.

Totally agree smallwhitecat.

dotnet, I thought the comment about borstal being rather like prep school was one of the saddest things in that article - I know another chap sent to boarding school age 7 who has since been in prison and said it was very similar :(

Hopefully prep school is no longer like that . . .

God how rude are you I have not ever seen a shit bird ? crime drama in my life.And don't call me love theres a dear.What are you basing your information on?As mine is based on personal experience and if I hadn't been as young as I was i shoudl have taken those involved to task but I was petrified.Don't assume that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong or lacks intelligence You sound pretty stupid yourself.

This student picked up the fire extinguisher knowing he was going to throw it, therefore putting lives at risk. He got justice.

The drink driver who killed my mother got drunk knowing that he would be driving home and therefore putting lives at risk. He got 18 months. That's what I call unjust.

I have only just joined the thread and not read all posts, but think that at 18 would it not occur to you that if you dropped a heavy object from a high building it could have devastating effects.

Maybe this might be a warning to people who think they can do what they like without thinking of the consequences to others.

FGS noddy. You told me to 'sod off' earlier. You may want to look a bit closer to home when talking about rude people.
As I said earlier, if you felt you were the victim of rough justice, that's unfortunate. But you really can't label the whole system as corrupt because it isn't.
Shitbird is a Northern expression around these parts

I've not read the article concerned, just the headlines.

It seems a ftting sentence, but it is severe in line with other sentences.

Ten years ago, I lost a very close friend. He was a very lovely intelligent happy person, and in his first year at Uni, crossed a road on a zebra crossing. He was hit by a speeding hit and run driver with no insurance etc. The hit and run driver got the next plane to Pakistan, to escape a sentence. However he soon returned to the UK to be sentenced. I think he decided a short term in jail, was better than living rest of his days in Pakistan. He got less than a year in jail.

I visit this friends parents every Christmas, and they are still destroyed by their lovely son's untimely death.

I just wish the UK's sentencing made sense. The polititian with the expense fraud got a longer sentence than dangerous uninsured driver.

NosyRosie, just read your comments, my sympathies. I agree, the sentencing was unjust.